View Full Version : Hot Off The Press! The Latest Television News and Info
bphisig
11-10-06, 10:53 AM
Fred
Any rumblings on whether The Nine and Friday Night Lights will be picked up for full seasons. I've seen that additional scripts have been ordered, but that's all.
The rumblings I hear are positive for each. But there is certainly nothing defitnie yet.
NBC will announce its new schedule next week, so we'll know on "FNL" by then. Perhaps next week's numbers will tell the story.
Personally, I don't get the appeal of "The Nine" but ABC seems to have lots bigger problems to fix.
Nielsen Notebook
ABC and CBS Share Sweeps Lead After First Week
By Marc Berman Media Week Nov. 10, 2006
Based on the first week of national data from Nielsen Media Research (Thursday, Nov. 2 through Wednesday, Nov. 8), ABC and CBS are leading the November 2006 sweeps period, with CBS first in total viewers and ABC No. 1 among adults 18-49.
Unlike prior sweeps when CBS was the immediate guaranteed winner in total viewers, only 160,000 viewers separate ABC and CBS meaning that anything can happen. And for ABC, which is up by 6 percent in total viewers year-to-year, this is a notable positive given that the audience was expected to diminish without Monday Night Football.
CBS and NBC are tied for No. 2 among adults 18-49, 9 percent below ABC, and CBS is down in both total viewers and adults 18-49 by minor percentages.
Ignited by Sunday Night Football, NBC is on the plus side, with growth of 9 percent in total viewers and an impressive 18 percent among adults 18-49. Fox ranks fourth in both categories, with erosion of 7 and 13 percent, respectively.
And the CW is a distant fifth at levels identical to the WB one year earlier, and down by 50,000 viewers from UPN (but equal among adults 18-49). Considering the CW has combined the strongest shows from the two former networks, these results are, no doubt, disappointing.
What follows are the first week Nov. 2006 sweeps results (with percent change versus the comparable year-ago period in parentheses for ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox):
Total Viewers:
CBS: 12.86 million (- 9)
ABC: 12.70 (+ 6)
NBC: 10.64 (+ 9)
Fox: 6.42 (- 7)
CW: 3.57
Adults 18-49:
ABC: 4.3 rating/11 share (- 4)
NBC: 3.9/10 (+18)
CBS: 3.9/10 (-11)
Fox: 2.6/ 7 (-13)
CW: 1.5/ 4
http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003380495
Thursday’s metered market over-night prime-time ratings – and Media Week Analyst Marc Berman’s view of what they mean -- have been posted just under the HD Football listings near the top of Ratings News the first post in this thread.
archiguy
11-10-06, 11:35 AM
The rumblings I hear are positive for each. But there is certainly nothing defitnie yet.
Personally, I don't get the appeal of "The Nine" but ABC seems to have lots bigger problems to fix.
Personally, I don't get people who don't get 'The Nine'. ;) To me, it's easily the class of the new season (although I haven't seen FNL). It's brilliantly written, superbly cast and acted, and has the most crisp direction and production values of any new show I've seen this season, and I've seen most of 'em. My wife and I find it riveting. In fact, next to the always-amazing 'BSG', it's now the show we most look forward to seeing each week (it's edged past 'LOST' for that dubious honor). Got to find out what happened in that bank! :)
That said, I kind of hope that it's ratings are just good enough to give it a full season and then the ax. I don't see where it can go after they resolve the bank heist scenario. This could be a great example of a "midiseries", a one-year wonder that can be viewed and appreciated in a finite period like a good novel. And there's an awful lot to appreciate in this underrated show.
Thursday’s updated fast national over night prime-time ratings – and Media Week Analyst Marc Berman’s view of what they mean -- have been posted just under the HD Football listings near the top of Ratings News the first post in this thread.
TV Q&A
Ask Matt
(from the Ask Matt column at TVGuide.com
By Matt Roush TVGuide.com TV Critic Nov. 10, 2006
Question: Don't get me wrong, I love Aaron Sorkin. Even bad Sorkin is better than a lot of the crap on TV these days. But while I like Studio 60, I don't love it. I find it interesting that people are always comparing it to The West Wing, when the more logical comparison is to Sports Night. I loved Sports Night, which was also about the behind-the-scenes happenings of a TV show. Any thoughts on why that concept worked so well on Sports Night, but not so well on Studio 60?— Robin
Matt Roush: First, keep in mind that Sports Night wasn't a ratings success, either. (I have bittersweet memories of penning TV Guide's "Best Show You're Not Watching" cover story on the show during its second, and regrettably final, season.) But you make a great point. In retrospect, Sports Night does seem to be more satisfying week to week than Studio 60 is turning out to be. Part of it, I think, has to do with the fact that the Sports Night characters were underdogs, working for a struggling cable sports network, and you quickly came to care deeply about these characters. They didn't act like top dogs because they weren't. Whereas on Studio 60, we're dealing with a show that's an institution and the characters are much higher-profile: an award-winning writer, glamorous stars who get quoted all over the media, high-powered execs, all of whom act like they're the center of the media universe. This smugness and self-importance can be a bit of a turnoff, even when the show itself is entertaining. I also feel more distance from these characters. With the exception of Matt and Harriet's turbulent on-and-off relationship, I don't feel I know any of them very well. That failing is especially notable in the Bradley Whitford character, Danny. We've known from the pilot that he has a drug problem. How long are they going to wait to give us some insights into it? A far cry from the almost instantaneous way we got to know Josh so well on The West Wing. For Studio 60 truly to work, it probably needs to focus less on the show versus the world (and the Christian right) and more on the people putting on the show.
Here's a different angle, from Natalie: "Regarding Studio 60 and 30 Rock: Would you agree that you can make a comedy about a comedy show, a drama about a drama show and a comedy about a drama show, but you just can't make a drama about a comedy show? (Makes your head hurt, doesn't it?)"
Honestly, you have no idea how much my head hurts. During a sweeps month, I often feel it's about to explode. But I guess my answer here is that there should be no rules where these shows-about-shows are concerned. The main goal should be to get you to care about the characters and believe in what they're doing. On that count, Studio 60 is lately coming up short in both arenas.
Question: I have an issue with Grey's Anatomy that has been bugging me for some time, but the preview for this week's episode really put me over the edge. Must every guy who steps foot into Seattle Grace hospital hit on Meredith? Can't we just have one episode where she does not get hit on by anyone? So far, we have had McDreamy, George, McVet, McSteamy, the bar guy who wound up in Seattle Grace with a "problem" the next day, and the countless patients who have told her she is pretty. Seriously?! The McDreamy vs McVet battle for Meredith was just childish and pathetic. Luckily that is now settled, but in the preview, we have McSteamy after her again. Seriously?! In my opinion, if any two women on the show should constantly get hit on, it should be Izzie and Addison, not Meredith. I can't be the only woman whose self-esteem gets temporarily shot down every time I see someone gaze at her longingly or hit her with a pickup line. Seriously!— Sarah
Matt Roush: Thanks for giving me a good laugh. Seriously! I adore the love-hate feelings so many people have for Meredith. She's one of my all-time fave lead characters precisely because she's such a maddening mess, and because she drives so many people crazy. (Kind of like a toned-down Ally McBeal, and almost as polarizing.) It probably is a stretch that Meredith would see more action than Izzie, but this is her show — and her anatomy, so to speak. Call me crazy, but I find her endearing. And seriously, you have every right to be annoyed, as long as you don't let it get in the way of your enjoyment. That wouldn't be cool.
Question: While I appreciate what you said in your Dispatch on Brothers & Sisters, I have to say that you and your colleagues at TV Guide are the reason I am not watching the show. It wasn't three months ago that you and other critics were underestimating B&S and reporting on the multiple rewrites, recasts and general chaos on the set. (You couldn't even review the show because they hadn't finished the first episode only a few weeks before it was supposed to air). After having been burned by the networks in the past with cancellations of shows I enjoyed, I felt this show was doomed from the start. Now everyone is jumping on the bandwagon. It's not that I take your word as law, but I trust that it is your job to have a better understanding of the entertainment industry than I do. Without firsthand knowledge or word of mouth, who else do we turn to if not the critics?— Amy
Matt Roush: To be fair, I was able to review the revised pilot for the show just in time for its premiere. My lead: "You can't always believe the buzz." Once I actually saw the show, my initial response was ambivalent. It was neither disaster nor triumph. Though very positive about the cast, I wondered if it was going to take itself too seriously and be too mopey to work as a companion to Desperate Housewives. It took the show a few weeks, but now it's clicking just fine. It's not a great show, but it's becoming an enjoyable one. This is what a first season is often all about: a show finding its voice. Every step of the way, we've been as honest as possible with readers. The buzz on the original pilot was not good. The impression the show gave at summer press tour was not promising. We were flying in the dark at that point and admitted as much.
But the thing to keep in mind about the job of covering television (and consuming such coverage) is that it's always a work in progress. I'm not in the business of giving false hope, and I'm a washout when it comes to predicting the future. But I think my reporting and commentary on Brothers & Sisters has all along been open-minded. Once the show found its legs, I let my opinion be known. It's not too late to come aboard this show, believe me. You'll figure out the relationships soon enough. It isn't Tolstoy. What it is, is a keeper.
Question: What do you think about The O.C's meager ratings? People are blaming it on the competition of the big Thursday-night showdown, but I think it's the fault of Fox's extremely aggressive marketing campaign. They sent out the first four episodes to anybody who's a nobody: fan-forum moderators, fansite maintainers, bloggers. It's ended up on eBay, and fans have shared it all over the 'Net. Most people who were interested in it had already seen it. So why watch it again when they could be watching something new? Then there's the fact that the last two seasons have been way below average, to say the least. Season 1 was fantastic, but seasons 2 and 3 focused on the two-bit characters while the main characters became background fodder. Josh Schwartz may have rectified this and refocused the show back to Ryan and the Cohens, but it's too little too late. I'm bitter about the time I wasted on the last two years, and surely in a few episodes it'll return to the norm and become all about Summer, Taylor and Kaitlin again. Ugh. Do you really think swapping around the days and airing double episodes is going to change anything? Should they just let the dying horse be?— Erin
Matt Roush: I wasn't shy about my dour opinion of the show in my recent review. I was amazed to realize The O.C. is only four seasons old. It looks and feels a lot creakier. Watching the four-pack of new episodes, I felt I'd seen it all before. But it still has loyal and enthusiastic fans, so I think Fox is wise to give it a shot on Wednesdays, especially now that Lost is vacating the premises. (I don't know how long the double run on Thursdays will last, but I've been led to believe Fox won't keep wasting the show there.) Fox may have oversaturated the market with screeners, it's true, but that still seems an awfully anecdotal way to explain the record low ratings. The real problem is that The O.C. never found its footing on Thursdays, and that may have coincided with creative doldrums. (I can't say for certain; I ditched most of last season.) If the ratings pick up on Wednesdays, I wouldn't be surprised if Fox rallies around it. It's still a pretty potent brand name, even if I saw nothing in these November episodes to convince me The O.C. was still creatively vital enough for Fox to keep it going past this season.
Question: It's fall again, and Fox is once again a failure. I sort of see the network as a homeless man, sinking into poverty every fall, getting a $100 check from his parents and blowing it all on booze over the next five months, only to find himself in deeper debt next fall. 'Til Death, Happy Hour, Standoff, Vanished and Justice are all bound to be canceled. It seems as if they fall asleep for three months and wait for American Idol and 24 to save them, while House and Prison Break are the feeding tube. They grabbed only one new serial, a bad one, and premiered several procedurals and hokey, unfunny, laugh-track sitcoms. This is the complete opposite of progress. I also question its strategy with The O.C. Are they moving it to Wednesday because they realized that they screwed over an established hit two years ago, or are they just trying to burn off the episodes faster? Getting this show's audience back should be an easy task: A show about rich teenagers with angst isn't hard to market. And though I couldn't even get through the third season, I'm now rooting for this show after its creative surge. It is honestly the highlight of my week now. — Adam C.
Matt Roush: I've already commented on The O.C.'s scheduling, which I think is probably a smart move in the short and long run. But I wouldn't argue with your statement that, of the four major networks, Fox has the least adventurous, least satisfying batch of fall series.
Only one of them (Justice) do I marginally like, and I won't exactly miss it if/when it goes. Fox has special challenges each fall season, given the built-in World Series hiccup, but this fall was especially disappointing. By the end of May, however, if Idol and 24 continue on their highs (and let's hope they do), Fox will once again be looking pretty, instead of looking pretty pathetic.
Question: How about last week's hostage-taking episode of Desperate Housewives? Pretty good, eh? Writer Joe Keenan deserves a writing nomination for making me laugh (Susan's megaphone declaration), cry (the beautifully shot dream sequences) and think (how will Lynette's life change?) all in the same hour. Brilliant stuff all the way around, and definitely the best episode since the pilot aired way back in 2004. What did you think?— Marcus D.
Matt Roush: If you read my Dispatch earlier this week, you know I feel pretty much the same. Laurie Metcalf was just amazing — funny and scary at the same time — and it was Felicity Huffman's best work since her first-season meltdown, which probably won her the Emmy. Just about everything clicked in that episode, reminding me what we loved about Desperate Housewives in the first place. Hope they can keep it up.
Question: Unless I've missed it, you have yet to opine on the new season of Battlestar Galactica. I have been anticipating this series for months and have not been disappointed. The way the show is able to convey emotions is incredible. When Adama went down to the pilot quarters and gave Starbuck and Tigh a butt whoopin', I was almost holding my breath. "You were a daughter to me, but no more. You are a malcontent and a cancer." I wouldn't want to be on Commander Adama's bad side. Edward James Olmos was magnificent: no yelling, no drama, but extremely powerful nonetheless. What do you think? — Jessica
Matt Roush: That was a great moment in a great season. I gave the show a 10 out of 10 in a roundup of "cult" series around the time the new season began. I can't give a higher rave than that. Last week's was the first episode I had to watch in real time. Sci Fi sent out the first four hours before the season began; I was blown away then, and still am now. The war allegories of occupation and collaboration involving insurgencies, secret tribunals and torture were as riveting as they were topical. And I'm almost as happy to see the dramatic fallout as I am to see Apollo back in fighting shape. (The only thing I haven't liked about this current season was Jamie Bamber's comical fat suit.)
Question: Just one more comment about the current lack of opening credits and theme songs: I was watching Numbers the other night, and Judd Hirsch's character sat down to watch late-night TV because "that's when the classics are on." As the scene faded, you heard the theme song from Taxi. I ask you, how are we going to get little jokes like that when today's shows have no recognizable tunes?— Claire
Matt Roush: And then there was the kicker on this week's How I Met Your Mother, in which Barney, aka "Swarley," was hounded out of the bar with the Cheers theme, while credits in the original Cheers typeface came on screen. Delicious. These themes and title credits are part of what we love and treasure most about TV's heritage.
Question: What do you think about the death of Eko on Lost? I realize that the writers are trying to keep people guessing, but come on, why did they have to kill off one of their strongest characters? They brought on three new regulars last season. They took all this time to show their backstories, how they struggled on the other side of the island, how hard it was for them to fit in with the other survivors, only to have them all killed off? I realize that Ana Lucia was a hard pill to swallow; I wasn't that upset when she died. I was disappointed when they killed off Libby. Her character had barely scratched the surface.
But now Eko? To me, he was one of the most interesting people on the show. His backstory broke my heart, and he instantly became my favorite character. Even more frustrating, in the same episode in which he's killed off, they introduce two new characters who (so far anyway) don't hold a candle to Eko. Even if they did, why should we care? They'll probably be dead in a few months. Also, this death didn't seem to have the same impact as earlier ones. People were sad about Boone. People were shocked about Ana Lucia and Libby. People are just mad and confused about Eko. If they have to kill a character, make it one whose story line isn't going anywhere. If the writing is good, it can still be sad and shocking (like Shannon's death). I would much rather watch Eko do anything than listen to Charlie make his usual sarcastic comments in the background (Hurley can do that). Plus, wouldn't it pack more of a punch if they weren't getting rid of characters so often? Now I just come to expect it, which means I won't get fully invested in the show or its characters anymore. I just don't trust where it's headed.— Tiffany J.
Matt Roush: As always, it's damned if you do, damned if you don't where Lost is concerned. Tiffany's rant contains most of the complaints I've been fielding in my mail since Eko's death, which I accepted as I do most things that happen on this show. I plan to address Lost's hiatus and the "fall finale" in Monday's column, but I've already decided to move past this initial six-pack of episodes, which I'm thinking we'll all look back on as a bit of a letdown. I loved the opener, with its reveal about the Others' village, and I am fascinated by Elizabeth Mitchell as Juliet, one of the most intriguing additions to the show since the beginning. But I haven't enjoyed watching Jack, Kate and Sawyer stay in lockdown for so long, and an episode of Sawyer being tortured isn't my idea of fun. (As for Locke's hallucinatory trip into Twin Peaks territory, I put that episode in the category of a favorite show having a very off week. It happens.)
I thought the way Rodrigo Santoro and Kiele Sanchez were introduced was awfully clumsy, but I'm certainly not going to judge their characters until there's more of a reason to. As for the death rate of characters on shows like this (and I'll add 24 to the discussion, just because): It comes with the territory. At least Eko's story had an interesting arc and a powerful finish. I don't know about the impact on the islanders — the fact that he was so silent and remote may account for their lack of grieving — but if the character made an impression on you, dead or alive, Lost did its job. I don't blame Lost for ABC's promotions, which made it too obvious that this would be Eko's swan song. But the idea that we could or should become less invested in the characters because we assume or maybe fear that they could be killed off is pretty illogical to me. That just sounds like more fan whining, which Lost breeds like no other. Lost is an adventure series in which peril waits around every corner, especially during sweeps months. If we didn't think valuable characters could meet their maker at any moment, as we have become accustomed to seeing on 24, it would be a much lesser show.
Question: It sounds like everyone is trying to figure out what show would work best after Lost: a comedy, Six Degrees, Men in Trees, etc. Here's my two cents: Lost is an altogether different kind of show, and, at least for now, nothing may truly succeed in the time slot after it. Lost is the first of its kind in many ways. It's a cult hit that is also a mainstream hit. It has devoted and obsessive fans who watch and then immediately get online or on the phone to discuss, debate and analyze what they've just seen — so they aren't sticking around to watch anything afterward. Even the more casual fans I know who don't hit the message boards or fansites still spend some time thinking and talking about the episode with their spouse, friends, etc. Yet unlike past shows that had such followings, Lost is a ratings hit and even won the Emmy its first year out. That's why the network expects it to act as a strong lead-in for another show. But is it really fair to expect any show to come on right after Lost and not lose a huge chunk of that audience? I hope ABC doesn't try to fix what ain't broke by moving Lost. But in a perfect world, maybe it would air at 10 pm/ET and ABC could focus on putting together a lineup that Lost fans would want to watch while waiting for the main event.— Ashley
Matt Roush: Moving Lost to the end of the night to make it the Wednesday piece de resistance as opposed to the centerpiece is an interesting idea. I assume the reason for keeping it on earlier, as it was when the show first premiered at 8 pm/ET in its first season, is to accommodate younger viewers who might not be available in the 10 pm hour — although, is that even applicable anymore? Anyway, lots could happen between now and February, when Lost returns. I'll be curious to see what ABC's Wednesday lineup will look like when that happens.
http://www.tvguide.com/News-Views/Columnists/Ask-Matt/default.aspx
flint350
11-10-06, 02:12 PM
Two small suprises in these last few posts for me. First, fredfa - I'm really surprised you don't like The Nine. Not just bcz I do or others do, but it has that appeal of clever writing, hidden agendas and suprises to come without silly teasers and, most of all, a complex set of characters who interact in ever more interesting ways. I'm always left with the feeling that something surprising or innovative is right around the corner. It's a thinking man's show and you appear to generally like those. Just curious.
Second, I would not have bet any $$$ that Studio 60 would get a full season. A few more eps, yes. But this full season pickup surprised me. The last show was much better, but I thought it was too little, too late. Wrong again. :D
Thanks for the (I think!) compliment, flint350.
My real problem with "The Nine" is just that I am not, in general, a fan of serials, and the first episode, while well done, just didn't spark my interest enough to add it to my list of must-see shows. In addition, I have a full roster of returning shows to attend to, as well as more than I expected of this year's new programs. I do generally like shows that are thought provoking, but there are quite a few of those thsat just don't work..for me. (Battlestar, Lost, and others). That doesn't mean I don't admire them and hope for their success, just that for me, they don't work.
That being said, I might well play catch up when the repeats start -- assuming they do.
As for "Studio 60", I always thought it probably would get renewed. NBC has more Januaruy problems than anyone else -- remember it not only has to replace its failed shows, but also fill in four hours of Sunday night programing. That daunting task was never really successfully accomplished by ABC in 35 years or trying on Monday nights, by the way.
And NBC, which I believe really wanted to keep "Medium" available for its January schedule, has already been forced to plug it in. I wouldn't at all be surprised to see "FNL" renewed, too, though perhaps with a brief hiatus until the SNF schedule ends. Once the real high school games are over on Fridays it might make a decent gamble there.
Failing to win over viewers, NBC might just have to make do with critical approval as it tries to rebuild. And, of course, with AI and 24 returning mid January, that task will become harder.
Personally, I don't get people who don't get 'The Nine'. ;) To me, it's easily the class of the new season (although I haven't seen FNL).
You really should give a FNL a look. My feeling about FNL is how you feel about "The Nine".
I like Nine, but I think it moving a little too slowly, we're only on the second hour of what happened in the bank. As flint350 notes though, it is well written and doesn't use cheap stunts to further the plot.
I totally agree, Jim. FNL is a delight which seems to get better week by week.
I totally agree, Jim. FNL is a delight which seems to get better week by week.
It's intelligent with some great acting from some relative new comers, something I really like to see. I get tired of the same old actors showing up in different shows.
I would say that FNL and Heroes are probably my two favorites of the new season. Heroes is just flat out fun to watch. :)
steverobertson
11-10-06, 04:31 PM
I love the cheerleader in FNL she seems like the perfect girl LOL
RussTC3
11-10-06, 04:47 PM
I agree about FNL. What an amazing little show.
Among new shows on the season, my top three are probably Heroes, Brothers & Sisters and Friday Night Lights.
archiguy
11-10-06, 04:58 PM
There's just too much good stuff on these days. I had to do a pre-season triage, and a show about high school football just didn't make the obvious cut for me. But, darnit, it sounds like it's a much better show than it sounded. Oh, well; too late now, probably. I am watching Heroes, though, and I agree that it's a lot of fun.
I have all the Heroes episodes on DVR and am looking forward to some rerun time in December for a marathon.
He did little television, but his death is still worth noting….
Obit
Jack Palance 87
From Associated Press
Jack Palance, the craggy-faced menace in "Shane," "Sudden Fear" and other films who turned to comedy at 70 with his Oscar-winning self-parody in "City Slickers," died today.
Palance died of natural causes at his home in Montecito, Calif., surrounded by family, said spokesman Dick Guttman. Palance was 85 according to Associated Press records, but his family gave his age as 87.
When Palance accepted his Oscar for best supporting actor he delighted viewers of the 1992 Academy Awards by dropping to the stage and performing one-armed push-ups to demonstrate his physical prowess
http://www.latimes.com/news/obituaries/la-111006palance,0,1642997.story?coll=la-home-headlines
Critic’s Notebook
The Shat, Kiefer vs. tree and more
From Maureen Ryan’s Chicago Tribune blog “The Watcher” November 10, 2006
(Note: all time are Central.)
A few news bits to tide you over until next week, when I'll post reviews of the new shows "3 lbs" and "Day Break."
• CBS is making all seven completed episodes of “Smith” (including four episodes that did not air) available online via its broadband channel, www.cbs.com/innertube. The episodes can also be downloaded via iTunes, Amazon and AOL. The network will also post a written synopsis explaining how the producers had planned to resolve the show’s ongoing plots.
• For those who’ve written in asking if there is any news, official or unofficial, regarding a full-season order for “Friday Night Lights,” I have not heard anything about that yet (same goes for “Veronica Mars”). But regarding “FNL,” NBC is expected to announce a schedule shakeup next week, and my fingers are crossed that “Lights” will get a full-season pickup then.
• The FX comedy series “It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia” will return for a third season next summer, and Danny DeVito will remain part of the ensemble at the dive bar in Philly where the “Sunny” crew hangs out.
• When “24” returns Jan. 14, Jean Smart and Gregory Itzin, who memorably played a fictional First Couple last season, will be back as part of the cast. The Season 6 cast also features Powers Boothe as vice president, James Cromwell as Jack Bauer’s father, as well as D.B. Woodside (Wayne Palmer), Regina King (Sandra Palmer) and Peter MacNicol (presidential advisor Thomas Lennox). Returning players include Mary Lynn Rajskub (Chloe O’Brian), Roger Cross (Curtis Manning) and James Morrison (Bill Buchanan).
• Ardent fans of either “24” or Kiefer Sutherland may want to check out the shambling documentary “I Trust You to Kill Me,” which airs at 8 p.m. Saturday on VH1. The film follows the European tour of Rocco Deluca and the Burden, a band on Sutherland’s record label. Sutherland is the nominal tour manager of this chaotic affair, but in the course of the film he loses his money, cell phone and various other personal items, so you can imagine how smoothly the tour went. Although it’s supposed to be about the band, the film is only really interesting when Sutherland is on the screen. He comes off as earnest, introspective, genuine and a little prone to insane behavior, especially when he’s had a few drinks. Yes, in this film, you can see Sutherland attack that Christmas tree in a London hotel (his tabloid claim to fame last year), but here you’ll see the tree attack in its full context, with some sheepish explanation and commentary from the “24” star.
• Like you don't already know this: The men of Dunder Mifflin are bringing sexy back.
• As of Nov. 30, “Men in Trees” is moving to 9 p.m. Thursdays, which firms up ABC’s Thursday lineup as the most chick-friendly block of the week. “Six Degrees,” which had been airing in that spot, will allegedly come back in January, but I wouldn’t count on it.
• The Sundance Channel has made the powerful documentary “The Staircase” available via iTunes. I can’t recommend this documentary, which is about a famous author accused of killing his wife, highly enough. Trust me, once you’ve seen the first 40 minutes of this fascinating film, you’ll have to see the whole thing.
• In case you’ve been living under a rock – which, let’s face it, during sweeps can seem like an attractive option – be aware that “General Hospital’s” Luke and Laura tie the knot once more on Thursday, the 25th anniversary of their famous first nuptials.
• Also next week, the new William Shatner game show, “Show Me the Money,” has a special preview 8:30 p.m. Tuesday, before settling into its regular time slot of 7 p.m. Wednesday on Nov. 22. I tried to watch an episode that ABC sent, but the rules for the trivia contest were fairly incomprehensible (it’s more or less a mishmash of “Deal or No Deal,” “1 vs. 100” and various other prime-time game shows). To distract viewers from the general chaos, there are 13 dancing girls. And the Shat. So there’s that.
http://tempo.typepad.com/entertainment_tv/
Was "Men in Trees" on last Friday? I don't recall seeing it.
Davinleeds
11-10-06, 06:15 PM
I have all the Heroes episodes on DVR and am looking forward to some rerun time in December for a marathon.
You sure you'll have enough free time?
I agree about FNL. What an amazing little show.
Among new shows on the season, my top three are probably Heroes, Brothers & Sisters and Friday Night Lights.
Brothers and Sisters is very good, I also like Men in Trees, which is in the same sort of vein as B&S.
Haven't been close enough attention, what's the prevailing scuttlebutt on "3lbs"?
There's just too much good stuff on these days. I had to do a pre-season triage, and a show about high school football just didn't make the obvious cut for me. But, darnit, it sounds like it's a much better show than it sounded. Oh, well; too late now, probably. I am watching Heroes, though, and I agree that it's a lot of fun.
I think you can get FNL online at NBC.com
The prevailing view as best I can tell is that is a House-esque show and while Stanley Tucci is good, he is no Hugh Laurie. But we shall see.
TV Notebook
Layoffs at Dateline NBC
By John M. Higgins Broadcasting & Cable 11/10/2006
The first wave of layoffs under the NBC Universal’s belt-tightening plan started hitting NBC News with at least 17 employees losing jobs at Dateline NBC. The bulk of the cuts came in New York, with a smaller number coming from Washington, D.C. and Chicago.
In addition to the layoffs, an unspecified number of employees have volunteered for a buyout package.
NBC News officials are expected to complete the initial round of layoffs throughout the division – all of those expected for 2006 – by next week. Further reductions are coming next year.
The layoffs are part of the company’s “NBCU 2.0” plan to engineer greater efficiency in the company. The 700 employees targeted will be eliminated primarily on the broadcast TV side of the company, with the movie studio and entertainment cable networks untouched. Inside the broadcast unit, the news division will sustain the greatest damage, largely because it’s more labor-intensive than entertainment.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleID=CA6390438
Fred you ought to take a bow when this 'inside baseball' thread pops a million views. It's getting close.
It'll ber a while yet AAF. If only I could get all those "Lost" folks to check in every day!
TV Notebook
'Dateline' lays off 17
Number does not include buyouts
By Michael Learmonth Variety.com
NEW YORK--Seventeen "Dateline" employees were issued pink slips Friday as NBC moved forward with a plan to pare hundreds of correspondents, producers and cameramen from the news division by early next year.
Sources inside NBC News said 10 "Dateline" staffers in New York were laid off, five in Washington, DC, one in Chicago and another in Burbank. The affected employees were notified by "Dateline" EP David Corvo.
That number does not include buyouts, which have been offered to dozens of employees across the company.
The restructuring, announced last month as part of the "NBC U 2.0" initiative, will eliminate several hundred jobs from the network's sprawling news division, which employs 2,000 and includes two cable networks and numerous local news staffs across the country.
As part of the initiative, New Jersey-based MSNBC is being consolidated into NBC News headquarters at 30 Rockefeller Center.
Sources say NBC execs were surprised news staffers who volunteered to take a buyout and predict that when the reductions are complete, the number of buyouts will exceed the number of layoffs.
Execs want to complete layoffs within a week to avoid having to do so close to the holiday season.
Several cameramen in the DC bureau were said to be considering buyouts, which would pay the rough equivalent of three year's salary and allow them to return as freelance employees after six months.
Other reductions in the news division are being achieved by not filling empty jobs.
Reporting expenses such as travel for correspondents have come under increased scrutiny, sources said.
"Dateline," once a five-nights-a-week series, was expected to take a significant hit during the restructuring. This season the show is airing once a week, on Saturdays, and is focusing editorially on true crime and its "To Catch a Predator" series on sexual predators.
The show's staff functions as a production unit for all NBC News shows and also produces special news programming for the network.
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117953710.html?categoryid=1043&cs=1
TV Notebook
“Justice” benched
The futon critic is reporting Fox has confirmed “Justice” will be replaced for the remainder of November sweep with “House” reruns.
“Justice” is reportedly coming back in December.
http://www.thefutoncritic.com/news.aspx?date=11/10/06&id=7235
TV Notebook
Here comes trouble
Alec Baldwin has become the default real-man screen heavy. Maybe it's how he makes a despicable lout somehow ... charming
.
By Matea Gold Los Angeles Times Staff Writer November 12, 2006
These days, if a part calls for someone to play brazen, caustic or swaggering — in short, a real man's man — one actor seems to have a lock on the role.
At least that's how it appears from Alec Baldwin's near-ubiquitous presence lately portraying men like Jack Donaghy, the bombastic and preening network executive on the NBC sitcom "30 Rock."
Baldwin calls them "man of authority" characters, "something you need to do sort of unflinchingly," he said during a lunch break on the show's Queens set, as he wolfed down a plate of rice and sauteed tofu.
Suddenly, he let out a delighted yelp. "30 Rock" creator Tina Fey had stopped in the lunch room with her 13-month-old daughter, Alice, in tow. Baldwin leaped out of his chair, gushing over the child and her colorful outfit. (It was Halloween, and Alice was decked out as a peacock, the NBC mascot.) "How are you?" Baldwin cooed, his gravelly voice an octave higher than usual. "I love your costume! Do you like your costume? Do you?"
This is Alec Baldwin, tough guy? "He's more like a small-town theater professor in real life than a dirty cop," Fey, who plays the frazzled head writer of the show's fictional late-night comedy sketch program, said later. "He is this very literate guy who loves the arts and goes to plays and opera and stuff. He's cultured."
For his part, Baldwin dismisses the notion that he would resemble his on-screen persona in real life as the thinking of "uncomplicated people."
"There is some degree of artistry involved in this, hopefully, where you sit there and say, 'Well, what do I want to say? Who do I want to be?' " he said.
After a stint as a leading man in the 1990s (see: "Hunt for Red October, The"), Baldwin has most recently reemerged as a character actor who imbues the most hard-edged, loutish parts with subtlety and humor. His ability to avoid caricature while playing the likes of casino boss Shelly Kaplow in 2003's "The Cooler," a role for which he garnered an Oscar nomination, has made him more in demand than ever.
"Some people don't want to step up and fill that void," he said, explaining why these types of characters often come his way. "The role demands a certain amount of clarity, a certain amount of forcefulness, a certain amount of authority that other people can't do, quite frankly. And many of them who can do it, don't want to do it. And so people have asked me."
He's currently in theaters as a macho, profane police official in Martin Scorsese's film "The Departed" and a remote, alcoholic father in Augusten Burroughs' "Running With Scissors." Up next month: Robert De Niro's "The Good Shepherd," featuring Baldwin as a CIA operative.
Lately, however, the 48-year-old actor has been itching to try his hand at a new kind of character.
"In truth, I'd rather do 'Little House on the Prairie' and play Michael Landon's role," he said without a trace of facetiousness. "I want to do something sweet."
That doesn't mean he's looking to play Charles Ingalls, necessarily, but "something that stays with people."
"I want to play what I haven't played," he added, his clear blue eyes fixed intently on his interviewer. "One thing about my career, I've done everything: TV, movies, theater. I really feel like I've done it all on one level. You become very conscious of being duplicative."
That's why Baldwin had some apprehension about signing on to "30 Rock," his first gig as a television series regular since playing Joshua Rush on "Knots Landing" in the mid-1980s.
"That is the great concern about doing a television series, that you get trapped into playing the same thing 22 episodes times however many years the thing winds up going," he said. "You can fall into these patterns where it's all pretty treadmill, you know?"
But Baldwin, who is unsparing in his criticism of the film industry ("We are now in the fully realized age of the no-risk movie"), was willing to take a gamble on a series, in part because television's more consistent schedule would allow him fly to Los Angeles every other weekend to visit his 11-year-old daughter. (He shares custody with ex-wife Kim Basinger.)
Fey actually had Baldwin in mind when she wrote the Donaghy character for "30 Rock," a show loosely based on her experiences as a head writer for "Saturday Night Live," but didn't think she had a shot at casting him.
"At the time, I was trying to think of the most masculine actor," said Fey, who had worked with Baldwin on the late-night program during his regular hosting gigs. "He's extremely manly. I thought I would use him as writing template. I never thought we would actually get him."
Kevin Reilly, president of NBC Entertainment, said that "everybody in town was chasing Alec Baldwin."
"I think he was probably sent every script in town," he added.
In fact, Baldwin was developing his own program for FX about a "Bill Clinton-like" mayor of New York when Lorne Michaels, executive producer of "Saturday Night Live" and "30 Rock," approached him about the Donaghy part.
Michaels' involvement in the show, coupled with Fey's writing, persuaded him to take a chance on it.
"It's been a blessing," the actor said. "It's a nice job, and I work with funny people."
For Michaels, having Baldwin on board rounded out a "dream cast."
"He's just dazzling as a comedian," said the producer, who invited Baldwin back to host "Saturday Night Live" this weekend, his 13th time since 1990. (Only Steve Martin, with 14 hosting appearances, has been on more.) "He has that thing writers love most, which is precision."
"But he's also got real strength," Michaels added. "You get the sense that he's a powerful guy, and I think he's able to pour that into a character."
In person, it's easy to see why Baldwin is so often cast as the heavy. He has thickened since his early hero roles, but his body — clad in an expensive pinstripe suit for a scene on a recent afternoon — is solid and burly; his beefy hand offers a firm grip.
Still, he manages to bring a certain lightness to his physicality, largely through a wry comedic touch. In "The Departed," his character's joking bluster with fellow cops provides audiences with "welcome relief" from the movie's dark plot, said producer Graham King.
"He helps pulls them through in a film that's really intense," King said. "He's such a smart actor when it comes to tweaking a character or delivering it a certain way."
On "30 Rock," Baldwin brought with him some definitive ideas of how to flesh out Jack Donaghy.
"I didn't want them to make the character the negative value in the piece, à la Ted Baxter, the guy that's the least self-aware person in the room," he said. "I didn't want to be some male corporate pig."
"I've struggled to get them to write more where I'm like Lorne," the actor added with a chuckle, "the guy who is this extraordinarily polished, wealthy, urbane man who lives among these young men and women who just can't seem to get their heads out of the dormitory."
• • • • • • • • • • •
If you want input, he'll give it
IN the past, Baldwin's tendency to come on to a set and "rearrange the furniture," as he has put it, earned him a reputation for being somewhat difficult. But Fey said she's welcomed his input, which has even included story lines for other characters.
"It's been a very good dialogue," she said. "You want someone who comes in and thinks of this character as a real person. He absolutely makes the guy three-dimensional and always wants to bring out his kinder side, his more knowing side."
So far this season, "30 Rock" has fallen short of the ratings NBC was hoping for, drawing an average of 6.2 million viewers. But the network still is bullish on the program. This week, it's moving from its 8 p.m. Wednesday slot to Thursday night, where it will be part of a new comedy block with "My Name Is Earl," "The Office" and "Scrubs."
"It feels like a show that's really on the right path," said Reilly, noting that "30 Rock" is getting a larger audience than "The Office" did in its first season, before it broke out as a hit. "That's why we're kind of making the bet on it with this new move, which I think is going to be a long-term play."
Baldwin has a more fatalistic attitude.
"If the audience is attracted to the show, great," he said flatly. "If not, they're not. If we fail, we fail like most other shows do. Most don't make it. The only contribution I can make is to just come in and do this the best I can, shot by shot, line by line."
On a recent afternoon, Baldwin taped a scene that called for Donaghy to be on the phone in his office, speaking affectionately with a "Condoleezza."
Baldwin took it from there, ad-libbing his own lines as the producers — watching on nearby monitors — shook with silent laughter.
"Where is your hand now?" he murmured slyly. "You shouldn't be doing that while you're driving. Condoleezza? Are you there? I lost her."
It may not be "Little House on the Prairie," but for now, Baldwin said he's content.
"To be perfectly honest with you, if I do this show and that's all I do in the next few years, that would be enough for me," he said. "I'm not someone who is doing this to kill time while I'm waiting to revive my fortunes in the movie business. I don't think about it that way. This is where I'm at now, this is what I'm doing."
http://www.calendarlive.com/tv/cl-ca-baldwin12nov12,0,4996821,print.story?coll=cl-tvent
RussTC3
11-11-06, 12:32 AM
Brothers and Sisters is very good, I also like Men in Trees, which is in the same sort of vein as B&S.
Isn't it though? It's really a joy to watch every week, the interaction between all the characters, the love they share yet struggle to show, its just wonderful. There are just so many great moments. Like one for instance, I'll mention it without spoiling it, when Justin helped his niece. Man oh man, that was great. I actually rewound that on the spot and watched it again.
It has really surprised me, especially since many critics panned it for some strange reason. I'm so very glad ABC has given it a full season order. It definitely has one of the best casts on television today.
It seems I've missed the boat to "Men In Trees" I DVRd the first episode but it got lost in the mess of great new shows this season. Perhaps I'll try to get into the series, I'm sure I'd enjoy it.
3lbs. seems interesting, plus its a medical drama, so I'm sure I'll give it a look.
Try to catch up with "Men In Trees", Russ. It is a quiet show that always leaves me happy I have spent timer with its characters each week.
I am looking forward to catching up -- soon -- with all the B&S episodes
Isn't it though? It's really a joy to watch every week, the interaction between all the characters, the love they share yet struggle to show, its just wonderful. There are just so many great moments. Like one for instance, I'll mention it without spoiling it, when Justin helped his niece. Man oh man, that was great. I actually rewound that on the spot and watched it again.
That was a fantastic scene, one of those rare moments you could call perfect TV. :)
shuttermaker
11-11-06, 10:26 AM
He did little television, but his death is still worth noting….
Obit
Jack Palance 87
From Associated Press
Jack Palance, the craggy-faced menace in "Shane," "Sudden Fear" and other films who turned to comedy at 70 with his Oscar-winning self-parody in "City Slickers," died today.
Palance died of natural causes at his home in Montecito, Calif., surrounded by family, said spokesman Dick Guttman. Palance was 85 according to Associated Press records, but his family gave his age as 87.
When Palance accepted his Oscar for best supporting actor he delighted viewers of the 1992 Academy Awards by dropping to the stage and performing one-armed push-ups to demonstrate his physical prowess
http://www.latimes.com/news/obituaries/la-111006palance,0,1642997.story?coll=la-home-headlines
Didn't he do "Ripley's, Believe it or Not"? Back in the late 70s early 80s? I used to LOVE that show!
Yes, I think the ABC show ran from 1982 to 1986 or so.
Critic’s Notebook
Top 10 Reasons TV Turns Us Off
When engaging turns enraging
By Chuck Barney Contra Costa Times TV critic Nov. 11, 2006
It's the end of another long, hard day. As we plop, bone-tired, into the couch, we turn our lonely eyes toward television, counting on it to provide some soothing comfort and escape.
Alas, all too often we end up feeling like we got punk'd. Not only does the medium bombard us with shows so rancid you can practically smell the stench through the screen, but it works on our every last nerve via an electronic assault of, among other things, ear-splitting commercials, mind-boggling schedule changes and trite plot devices.
Is it any wonder some of us have the urge to make like Elvis and bust a cap in our TV set -- or, at the very least, file an airtight restraining order against it?
Maybe the problem is that the people who work in television are clueless when it comes to realizing how ticked-off we really are. And maybe it's time we let them know.
With that in mind, we've put together a list of some of our biggest TV annoyances -- things that bug us to no end. Without further ado, let the rant begin:
1. LAUGH TRACKS: Canned laughter long has been a major pet peeve (don't you dare tell us when to chuckle or chortle!). But in an era rife with unfunny sitcoms, it's downright insulting. Note to all comedy writers: If your jokes fail to provoke even a smile from your spouse and/or mother, a laugh track won't compensate for your deficiencies.
2. PADDED REALITY-TV RESULTS SHOWS: Sure, "American Idol" and "Dancing With the Stars" are good frothy fun, but the fun ends on "results" night when we're force-fed about 50 minutes of worthless filler and commercials, and only 10 minutes of material that we actually care about. Say it with us, people: "We're as mad as hell and ..."
3. NOISY COMMERCIALS: So you have the volume on your TV set exactly at the point where it doesn't scare the cat and/or prompt the neighbors to take up firearms. Then, suddenly, a booming commercial comes on with decibel levels equal to those of a Rolling Stones concert. Horrified, you scramble for the mute button as earwax sprays the walls. Not even Jack Bauer was put through this kind of torture.
4. PREMATURE CANCELLATION: A network spends all summer urging you to go on a blind date with a show -- say, like "Smith" or "Kidnapped" -- and by fall, you agree to launch a relationship. But then -- poof! -- in what seems like an instant, said show is gone. No explanation. No goodbye note. It's just gone. Not only do you feel totally jilted, but you become gun-shy about ever committing to another such show. In the immortal words of Tom Petty and Stevie Nicks: "Stop draggin' our hearts around"!
5. CHARACTER VOICE-OVERS: When does a TV plot device go from entertaining to irritating? When it becomes a tired cliche. Do we really need to hear Meredith Grey (Ellen Pompeo) spew superficial bromides about romantic relationships over scenes from "Grey's Anatomy"? (That's so "Ally McBeal" and "Sex and the City.") And why does the voice of Mary Alice Young (Brenda Strong) of "Desperate Housewives" live on two years after her character died?
6. MUSICAL MONTAGES: Speaking of cliches, does it seem like every drama these days feels the need to finish out an episode with a painfully earnest song playing over scenes of emotionally fragile characters hugging each other, trudging through the rain, or staring off into space like little sad-eyed puppies? When, exactly, did scriptwriters run out of things to write?
7. WOMEN AS VICTIMS: The preponderance of crime procedurals is reason alone to kill your TV. But maybe we'd be a little less disgusted if these shows weren't constantly upping the ante when it comes to depicting grisly violence perpetrated against women. Even more troubling: This season, the trend seems to be spreading to teens and children. Enough is enough.
8. INTRUSIVE PROMOTIONAL BUGS: The doctors of "House" are frantically trying to revive a patient. They're pounding on her chest and yelling "Come on! Come on!" Meanwhile, you're so tense that you're practically leaving claw marks in your couch ... when what should appear at the bottom the screen? Goofy Bart Simpson reminding you to watch "The Simpsons" on Sunday night. Talk about ruining the moment.
9. ADVANCE AD SPOTS THAT PROMISE -- OR GIVE AWAY -- TOO MUCH: Nothing irks us more than to be hit with a hyped-up ad that gives away a juicy plot development on our favorite show. (Why do you think we avoid Internet spoilers?) Well, maybe something does irk us more: Ads that deceive us into believing something HUGE is going to happen, only to eventually discover that we got played.
10. SCHEDULE CHANGES/TIME-SLOT SHENANIGANS: Raise your hand if you've had your DVR recording all screwed up because some numskull programmer decided to start "The Nine" at 10:02 p.m.? Oh, we so feel your pain. OK, raise your hand if you sat down to watch "Studio 60" at its regular time, only to discover that some other numskull decided to shuffle shows at the last minute.
Now use that hand to pen your own list of complaints and send it to those numskulls. You'll feel better. We promise.
http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/entertainment/columnists/chuck_barney/15983289.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp
rebkell
11-11-06, 03:01 PM
Was "Men in Trees" on last Friday? I don't recall seeing it.
I don't think this got answered, but no it wasn't on last week. We had a new one last night and I don't think we get any more shows until Nov 30, when it starts airing on Thursdays.
Correct, rebkell -- the next airing of "Men In Trees" will be Thursday, Nov. 30th at 10 PM ET/PT, following "Grey's Anatomy".
I don't think this got answered, but no it wasn't on last week. We had a new one last night and I don't think we get any more shows until Nov 30, when it starts airing on Thursdays.
Yes, thanks, I caught last night's airing and it didn't look like I missed anything, thanks for the confirmation. :)
Washington Notebook
NAB, Democrats and the Election
By John Eggerton Broadcasting & Cable 11/13/2006
Washington turned Democratic blue after last week’s midterm elections, with broad implications for broadcasters and cable operators. The change in the makeup of the House and Senate could affect the TV-sex-and-violence debate and give new ammo to foes of media consolidation.
Sensing the shift among voters, the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) hedged its bets and began funding key Democrats toward the end of the campaign.
NAB President David Rehr, hired in part for his red-state connections, assured reporters the day after the election that he can effectively work with Democrats, who will control both the House and, by the slimmest of margins, the Senate.
“I have a lot of friends who are Democrats,” says Rehr, who will be looking to make some new ones as well.
Much of the NAB’s PAC-money donations to Democrats came in the final phase of the campaign. Early on, 67% of NAB money was going to Republicans and only 33% to Democrats, according to the Website opensecrets.org.
THE GAP NARROWED
As the election neared, the NAB upped its Democratic percentage to 45% of the $700,000 it directed to candidates or parties. “Our giving pattern is the best it’s been for Democrats for five or 10 years,” Rehr says.
NAB’s blue-state bankroll included contributions to the campaigns of Rep. Nancy Pelosi ($2,500 to her campaign, $5,000 to the Democratic-leadership PAC), Rep. Ed Markey ($10,000) and Rep. John Dingell ($7,000).
It even contributed to frequent media critic Sen. Joe Lieberman ($6,000) because the Connecticut Democrat-turned-Independent was running against Democratic candidate Ned Lamont, whom Rehr calls “a cable guy”; Lamont owns a small cable company.
Now the NAB and, to a lesser extent, the National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA) will have to cozy up to new pols. In the House, Markey (of Massachusetts) and Dingell (Michigan) are in line to take over the House Telecommunications Subcommittee and the Energy and Commerce Committee, respectively. The Senate Communications Subcommittee will probably stay much the same, with the current co-chairmen switching chairs. Most of the telecommunications-bill action will probably come from the House side.
The old Congress comes back this week for a last, lame-duck hurrah, but that will likely be focused on the budget. One broadcast-related action could be FCC Chairman Kevin Martin’s renomination hearing and vote. There has been a hold on his nomination, widely believed to have been placed by Senator John Sununu (R-NH) over Internet- phone issues.
Rehr is already looking forward to the next session and was talking up Dingell last week as a more broadcaster-friendly Energy and Commerce chairman than current Chairman Joe Barton (R-Texas), who was, among other things, dead set against digital multicast must-carry.
“Joe Barton came out of kind of the ultra–free-market perspective,” Rehr says. “You know: 'Government shouldn’t be involved at all. Why should we give you anything? You should have to pay for everything.’”
By contrast, he says, Dingell “has had a very good relationship with the Michigan Broadcasters Association and our television board Chair Alan Frank [from Post-Newsweek in Detroit].”
DINGELL TALKS TOUGH
The NCTA was not weighing in on the new Congress, but essentially the Energy and Commerce Committee will be switching “a cable guy” in Barton for a broadcaster/telco-friendly chairman in Dingell.
That may not be so damaging. Lobbying is about relationships, and NCTA chief Kyle McSlarrow is well-liked and well-respected, says a lobbyist who often argues the other side on cable issues.
For his part, Dingell wasn’t throwing kisses at either the broadcast or the cable industry. At a press conference last week, he said the committee will take a hard look at any loosening of media-ownership rules, with an eye toward protecting the public interest and diversity of voices.
Another veteran lobbyist sees a tough time for the FCC’s Martin on ownership issues, with hearings and perhaps even legislation blocking further deregulation. One lobbyist says Democratic Commissioners Jonathan Adelstein and Michael Copps, vocal consolidation critics, “will be happy to gin things up.”
This lobbyist, however, says, “I expect, if they do anything on ownership, it will be [lifting the ban on newspaper/broadcast crossownership] and that will be it.”
A veteran Washington communications lobbyist is less optimistic than Rehr and thinks the NAB has “a little bit of an uphill climb.” Another calls it “rough sledding.” That’s even considering that the organization recently added a quartet of Democratic lobbyists, including the newly hired former Texas Democratic Congressman Max Sandlin.
CONSUMER-FRIENDLY DEMOCRATS
Rehr sees Democrats’ traditional consumer-friendliness working for broadcasters on issues like multicasting and freeing up more money for DTV-to-analog converter boxes.
Currently, as much as $1.5 billion has been allocated to pay for the converters, but Rehr thinks the Democrats could free up some more. “I believe there is going to be more than the $1.5 billion.”
The difference between the Republicans and the Democrats, he says, is that, when the money runs out, “the Republicans will say, 'You spent all the money, too bad.’ The Democrats will not allow a person to be disenfranchised.”
The downside is that there will likely be more attention on direct-to consumer drug and alcohol advertising. Dingell says those issues, with billions of ad dollars at stake, are on his radar screen. And, with Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) and Lieberman wielding more power, TV violence could get more attention, an issue Rehr says the NAB TV lobbying staff is going to start paying more attention to.
On the red-hot-button issue of indecency, the Parents Television Council, for one, doesn’t expect much difference with a Democratic-controlled Congress. “There is a commitment to our issues across the board,” says PTC government-affairs chief Dan Isett. “I don’t anticipate any of that is going to change.”
One veteran lobbyist agrees: “I don’t see any change. Politically, it’s a loser issue for anyone who defends the broadcaster side.”
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleID=CA6390449
Washington Notebook
Democrats In Charge, but Not Threatening
Telecom Policy Not Likely To Be On Capitol Radar
By Ted Hearn MultiChannel News 11/13/2006
Washington— If anything bad happens to the cable industry as a result of the Democratic takeover of Congress, it shouldn’t happen very fast.
Angry about war in Iraq and corruption on Capitol Hill, voters booted House and Senate Republicans from power last Tuesday. The watershed election put Democrats in charge of both chambers for the first time in 12 years.
END OF AN ERA
The election ended an era of cable-industry oversight by Republicans with a free-market orientation. But because House and Senate Democrats have made the issues that drove voters to the polls their legislative agenda to start 2007, it’s highly unlikely that incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has plans to move telecommunications policy to the forefront of the new Congress.
“I would just note that this election was not about telecom,” Stifel Nicolaus telecom analyst Blair Levin said.
For the time being, Levin expects a benign environment for cable on such matters as franchise reform, network neutrality, and any mandate, to sell cable channels one at a time to viewers, known as a la carte pricing.
“I don’t believe that Congress is likely to pass a big, comprehensive bill,” Levin said.
Jessica Zufolo, who tracks telecom policy at Medley Global Advisors, said telecom legislation won’t be foremost on Democrats’ minds.
“Telecom is not going to be a big focus in the next two years,” Zufolo said.
Institutional forces would assist cable if the industry wound up needing to block bad legislation. House leaders can ram a bill through the chamber, but the same is not true in the Senate, where a 60-vote supermajority is needed to quell filibustering by minority opponents. Democrats will have a 51-49 margin in the 110th Congress.
Meanwhile, President Bush is expected to make greater use of his veto power to check the Democrats — something he did only once since 2001, so as not to offend congressional Republicans.
The National Cable & Telecommunications Association declined to comment on the election’s results.
The Democratic lawmakers who will exercise dominion over cable, phone and broadcast companies are familiar faces, with decades of experience in the recondite world of telecommunications policy.
In the Senate, the Commerce Committee will likely be headed by Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), taking the gavel from Ted Stevens (R-Alaska). Inouye, who has not staked out an agenda, isn’t likely to move a telecom bill early next year, an aide to the senator said last week. Inouye, 82, was elected in the Senate in 1962.
VETERAN LEADERSHIP
In the House, cable lobbyists will need to answer to Reps. John Dingell (D-Mich.) and Edward Markey (D-Mass.). Dingell is expected to take the chairmanship of the Energy and Commerce Committee and Markey the chairmanship of the Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee.
Their combined House tenure is 82 years.
Both held the same positions when Democrats lost power in 2004. In 1992, Dingell and Markey were instrumental in securing passage of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act, subjecting cable operators to comprehensive regulation at the Federal Communications Commission. In 1996, Dingell and Markey backed the first major overhaul of telecommunications statutes in 60 years, a law that eliminated some cable rate controls in early 1999.
Dingell would take the gavel from Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas), a deregulator who often sided with the NCTA on such hot topics as net neutrality and multicast must-carry.
“I think Mr. Dingell, frankly, is an improvement for us over Mr. Barton,” said National Association of Broadcasters president David Rehr. “[Barton] was just a cable guy.”
In an interview, Dingell indicated interest in passing a telecommunications bill, though he wouldn’t commit to a timetable.
“Clearly, we’ve got to do something about the telecom bill,” Dingell said. “We passed a bill which I regrettably was not able to support, but the Senate has taken no action on it. I think we’re going to try and do that again in a responsible way.”
The House passed a telecommunications bill in June, but the effort collapsed in the Senate, largely over the contentious issue of net neutrality. Both bills sought to expedite the entry of AT&T and Verizon Communications into cable markets by reducing the oversight role of local governments.
“I think we’ll take a look at it. I can’t tell you how far we will go,” Dingell said, referring to cable franchising.
Rep. Rick Boucher (D-Va.) — who would likely become chairman of the telecommunications subcommittee if Markey took the chairmanship of the House Resources Committee — said last week that franchise reform might be off the agenda.
“[The phone companies] may not come back and ask for video franchise-relief. I wouldn’t be surprised if they just trust their fate to states on that. They are doing pretty well in the state capitals,” Boucher said.
Dingell also is watching to see whether Federal Communications Commission chairman Kevin Martin goes too far in relaxing ownership of radio and TV stations in local markets.
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6390451.html?display=Top+Stories
TV Notebook
`60 Minutes' and friends plan tribute to Bradley
(The Chicago Tribune) November 11, 2006
"60 Minutes" will give its late correspondent Ed Bradley a send-off on Sunday with an hourlong tribute that features interviews with close friends and a solo by jazz musician Wynton Marsalis.
Bradley, a 26-year veteran of the CBS newsmagazine, died of leukemia on Thursday.
Sunday's special includes Steve Kroft's interviews with some of Bradley's closest friends: musician Jimmy Buffett, journalist Charlayne Hunter-Gault and Marsalis.
Morley Safer will review the legacy of Bradley's estimated 500 "60 Minutes" stories.
Lesley Stahl will do a profile of Bradley, from his childhood in Philadelphia to his job at "60 Minutes."
It will air in the "60 Minutes" time slot at 7 PM ET/PT.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/tv/chi-0611110250nov11,1,1322160.story?coll=chi-ent_tv-hed
The Business of Television
Happy Hostilities!
By John M. Higgins Broadcasting & Cable 11/13/2006
Broadcasting and cable executives are bracing for their new holiday tradition, the annual outbreak of fights over cable systems' carriage of local TV stations.
Dec. 1 is a pivotal day. Many systems' deals to retransmit local TV signals—so-called retransmission consent—expire at the year's end. Federal rules require them to give subscribers 30 days' notice that a station may go dark. Stations routinely grant extensions to keep negotiations going or to push the whole matter off for a few months.
But a station intent on provoking a clash will set a deadline, forcing the issue. When the Chyron warnings start crawling on cable channels telling customers they may lose the channel they're watching, the game is on.
Sinclair Broadcast Group is embroiled in a showdown with cable operator Mediacom, threatening to yank its signal from various systems serving around 700,000 subscribers in 22 markets, mostly in small towns and Iowa cities like Des Moines and Cedar Rapids. Medicom has gone to court and the FCC to slow Sinclair down.
Other fights are simmering as well. The Hearst-Argyle station group is battling with Cox Communications. A dozen CW affiliates are trying to get carriage on Time Warner Cable. CBS-owned stations' agreements with several smaller cable operators are expiring soon, and CBS Corp. President/CEO Leslie Moonves has practically made securing cash payments from operators his personal crusade.
Broadcasters believe they deserve meaningful cash from cable systems seeking to retransmit TV stations' signals. So far, stations have squeezed cash only out of satellite and small cable operators.
A Pandora's Box?
Major operators still resist. They offer compensation like buying advertising or carrying a cable network that a broadcast company has launched. (That's how Fox's FX came to be in many markets). Cable operators fear that cash deals will open a Pandora's box that could ultimately cost them $1 billion a year.
The Medicom-Sinclair fight is nasty. Mediacom CEO Rocco Commisso looks and speaks every bit like the Bronx Italian former nightclub owner that he is. What is less immediately apparent is his financial savvy, developed through years as a commercial banker and cable executive.
Sinclair's gruff CEO, David Smith, seems to revel in provoking fights. He is not part of the broadcasters' “club” and doesn't seek to be.
It's getting personal. In a recent earnings call with analysts, Smith said that the fact that Mediacom took the retrans fight to the court and the FCC rather than continuing negotiations “speaks to the integrity and credibility that they have as a company and as a group of people.” Industry executives say that Commisso was enraged over Smith's remarks.
Sinclair General Counsel Barry Faber says Mediacom executives and lawyers “have screamed at me, have sworn at me, have called me names. My experience with Medicom is, they think you're reasonable if you agree with them. If you don't, they're yelling and bullying and threatening to go to war.”
Mediacom Executive VP John Pascarelli says, ultimately, viewers are the ones that pay: “If we agree to their outrageous demands, cable bills go up even more. If we don't agree, Sinclair pulls the stations. Either way, the consumer gets hurt.”
Sinclair laid out a price schedule to Mediacom calling for 36¢-40¢ per subscriber monthly for systems carrying any of the company's affiliates of the Big Four networks, and 10¢-12¢ to carry affiliates of The CW or MyNetworkTV. But court filings show that Sinclair has also proposed deals at around half those costs.
So, bottom line, Medicom would have to pay about $2 million a year. That's hardly crushing, but Commisso worries that succumbing to Sinclair's demands would encourage other broadcasters to try to ask for even more. (ABC once suggested that its stations should be worth $2 per sub.)
Both companies are in a bind. Mediacom risks losing customers to satellite TV, but Commisso doesn't have the leverage to inflict much pain on Sinclair in return. A cable system is most powerful if it dominates the market, which means a station risks losing the bulk of its viewers—and advertisers, as well —overnight.
Sinclair's Strategy
In this case, Sinclair's Des Moines and Cedar Rapids, Iowa, stations would be crunched, and possibly crushed. But Sinclair will suffer far less damage than if it picked a fight with, say, Comcast, which owns systems in two of Sinclair's largest markets, Baltimore and Pittsburgh.
Sinclair needs to win. The company has touted retransmission-consent payments as a key source of growth, telling investors the fees could reach $80 million-$100 million annually. If so, that would increase Sinclair's operating cash flow by 25%-30%.
Medicom has lost an initial round in court, and the FCC hasn't ruled. But this is only one of many fights to come. The only sure beneficiaries are media attorneys, who can count on these fights to generate a nice Christmas bonus each year.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleID=CA6390354
Sigwolf
11-11-06, 10:33 PM
The Business of TV
Just why the scuffle over DVR viewing
Why indeed. Delayed viewing is stunningly high
By Kevin Downey MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Nov 9, 2006
Says Wurtzel: “The concern we have is that if we continue to do business on a live-only basis then we’re distorting what the viewing is."
http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/printer_8444.asp
Genius... absolute genius. :rolleyes: A man in his position is just starting to figure this out now? Between my wife and I, our household watches *23* primetime network shows. According to Nielsen standards we watch absolutely none, nada, zilch. For the past two seasons the only television we watch live is sporting events and occassionally the news. Everything else is viewed from the DVR. It's about time the networks figure out these weekly ratings have very little, if any, connection to how many actual people are interested in and truly watching their shows.
DVD Notebook
“Threshold”
They Fought the Aliens, and the Viewers Shrugged
By Jon Caramanica The New York Times November 12, 2006
Network shows die all the time, though few have died with less fanfare than “Threshold,” which ran for eight episodes on CBS in the fall of 2005. An astutely written, legitimately spooky sci-fi drama that played like the early “X-Files” with better lighting and makeup, and vivid (if sometimes cartoonish) computer-enhanced special effects, it was a ratings dog, canceled with its final four episodes unshown. An online petition to save the show didn’t even draw 1,000 signatures.
On “Threshold” an elite team is convened to fight a mysterious alien infection transmitted through sound, food, sex and myriad other avenues. True, it’s a dull conceit, except that the casting — some of the most eclectic in recent television memory — appeared to have been done by blind dart toss. There was Brent Spiner, a k a Mr. Data from “Star Trek: The Next Generation”; Charles S. Dutton, the star of “Roc”; Peter Dinklage, the little guy from “The Station Agent”; and Rob Benedict, formerly that irksome kid from “Felicity.” Justifying and holding together this motley crew was Carla Gugino, late of the short-lived “Karen Sisco,” a much-liked actress who has yet to meet the TV series she can carry.
As Dr. Molly Anne Caffrey, she headed an unusually jovial crew, the most compelling member of which was Mr. Dinklage’s Arthur Ramsey. A linguist and mathematician with a booze-and-strippers problem, Ramsey was utterly lewd and snarky, the rare unsympathetic character who didn’t inspire pity or revulsion. Instead, his peculiar combination of id and self-loathing felt honest and unsentimental, refreshing for a show in which aliens spend each episode trying to find a way to infect all the humans on Earth.
Why the show’s final four episodes didn’t merit even a Saturday-night burn-off is a mystery unanswered by the recently released DVD box. Was it the throwaway joke about Iraq? Or maybe the cockamamie story line about how two neutron stars will collide, creating cosmic radiation that will irreparably damage Earth and its population, a fate the aliens are trying to prevent? Did they fear broadcasting the scene with a shirtless, postcoital Mr. Dinklage (coincidentally, one of his best performances in the series)?
The show was only getting better. (“Threshold” began reruns on the Sci Fi Channel last week. The channel will present all the episodes, including the four unshown ones.) In the episodes that were never broadcast, a new character — a renegade semi-infected doctor who metes out genetically enhanced vigilante justice against the alien infectees — captures the interest of Dr. Caffrey. Additionally the premises of the episodes, which appeared loose at the season’s outset, were beginning to cohere, even as they became more audacious. Which is to say the show’s core mystery was becoming less of a crutch, making “Threshold” a science-fiction show decreasingly interested in science or fiction, without sacrificing its intensity, or its weirdness.
In the bonus interviews packaged with this set, the show’s creators reveal that they learned of its impending cancellation while shooting the final episode, leaving them barely enough time to scribble out a clean resolution to the series. But if the bulk of that episode is any indication, they had at least an inkling that the end was nigh while writing it. A slapstick comedy hour that somehow evokes “Three Men and a Baby,” “Rosemary’s Baby” and “Night of the Living Dead,” it is remarkably self-aware television. Either the creators sensed doom was around the corner and responded accordingly, or they were just finding a comfortable stride, and had plenty more tricks up their sleeves.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/12/arts/television/12cara.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&ref=television&pagewanted=print
Genius... absolute genius. :rolleyes: A man in his position is just starting to figure this out now? Between my wife and I, our household watches *23* primetime network shows. According to Nielsen standards we watch absolutely none, nada, zilch. For the past two seasons the only television we watch live is sporting events and occassionally the news. Everything else is viewed from the DVR. It's about time the networks figure out these weekly ratings have very little, if any, connection to how many actual people are interested in and truly watching their shows.
It is not in their interests to admit that, Sigwolf -- after all the advertisers pay the bills, and networks want advertisers to think that all of us with DVRs watch the commercials, too. But that percentage4 is still only about one ion six households.
I agree that since getting my first TiVo four years ago, I have rarely watched anything live -- I'll just start an hour-long show 15 minutes in to miss the commercials. I even watch many sports events the same way, and, if I figure it out right, catch up to the final few minutes live.
I'd bet that in the (relatively) near future, the networks will be able to offer (via fiber or satellite or something as yet undiscovered) a viewer's choice:
a) get all programs VOD with commercials for a small fee, or
b) all program without commercials for a substantially higher fee.
DoubleDAZ
11-11-06, 10:50 PM
And it gets even worse when adding Tivo stats to the mix in an attempt to account for DVR usage. Many Tivo folks, at least many that post in these forums, simply record as much as they can and end up watching only a fraction of what they record. While your 23 is a large number, we currently keep up with 36 network primetime programs (only one of which is a half hour sitcom, only one reality program, no news programs, and only one that is not watched by both of us, whew!). None of these get counted either, and neither do the other recordings like SG1, Atlantis, BSG, The Closer, Monk, The Factor, et al. The current system is a joke, but I suspect many would object if they tried "collecting" more accurate data, no matter how innocent. :)
Sigwolf
11-11-06, 10:52 PM
It is not in their interests to admit that, Sigwolf -- after all the advertisers pay the bills, and networks want advertisers to think that all of us with DVRs watch the commercials, too. But that percentage4 is still only about one ion six households.
I agree that since getting my first TiVo four years ago, I have rarely watched anything live -- I'll just start an hour-long show 15 minutes in to miss the commercials. I even watch many sports events the same way, and, if I figure it out right, catch up to the final few minutes live.
I'd bet that in the (relatively) near future, the networks will be able to offer (via fiber or satellite or something as yet undiscovered) a viewer's choice:
a) get all programs VOD with commercials for a small fee, or
b) all program without commercials for a substantially higher fee.
It may well not be in their interests to admit, but they should know enough to figure out that statements like that just make him look like a clueless, out-of-touch idiot. Surely painting that picture cannot be in their best interests, either.
Your proposed future scenario seems like a fine one... until you take into account what is likely to follow. At what point after such a system is implemented does the "broadcast flag" rear its hideous head, removing our ability to DVR the shows on our own and avoid paying any additional fees for VOD?
I detest the idea of the broadcast flag, but I see little to indicate it won't be implemented in some form.
Critic’s Notebook
'Trace' lets LaPaglia's agent loose again
By Jon Caramanica Special to The Los Angeles Times November 12, 2006
(Sunday night) on CBS' "Without a Trace," the suit comes off, and Anthony LaPaglia's Agent Jack Malone looks grateful and drained, as if he'd just crossed a desert for the privilege. Working undercover, he lets a cigarette dangle at an absurd, leisurely angle and, when kidnapped himself, calmly sweet-talks his stiletto-booted abductor. He peels off lines from "Silence of the Lambs" ("I'll put the lotion in the basket, lady!") as if there were nothing more natural than being duct-taped to a chair, staring down the wrong end of a nail gun.
Anything to get out of the office.
As far as team leaders on procedurals go, LaPaglia's Malone is an original. Not clinical like "CSI's" Gil Grissom (William Petersen) or faux slick like Horatio Caine (David Caruso) on "CSI: Miami" or just plain pretty like Lilly Rush (Kathryn Morris) on "Cold Case," Malone is on-the-verge and frighteningly loose. As the show's seasons have progressed (it's now in its fifth) he looks more and more as if he's unraveling — held together by his suit, which is just a hair tight, and a broad-collared shirt out of which his head seems to be bursting.
LaPaglia is never better than the scenes in which he's staring someone down from across the FBI interrogation table, when it seems that a small earthquake is occurring just underneath the skin of his face. He's a study in contrasts: a brute who carefully chooses whom he antagonizes; a soft man who's impossibly tough; full of hypermasculinity that's somehow nonsexual.
And, natch, the type of investigator who's all too eager to let his personal feelings interfere with the execution of his work, so long as justice is served. One of last season's most poignant moments came when, after tracking down a young boy who'd witnessed a murder, Malone confronted the Albanian mob boss who had masterminded the killing and gotten away. After a brief conversation, he attacked the man, relieved him of his gun and put it to the boss' temple, promising retribution should he ever decide to revisit the situation.
Similarly, in this season's fourth episode, when Malone was squaring off with a security guard at a girls' detention center who sidelined as a pimp, his eyes were wet — not with tears, but with the glazed look of the slightly deranged. Yet rather than play Malone as a loose cannon, LaPaglia makes him righteous. It's a smart stroke for a character perpetually grappling with time pressures ("Trace" deals with missing person cases). He never fully loses control but always projects as if he might — the better to encourage expediency in others.
LaPaglia, who is Australian, is best known for his work on "Trace," which has earned him a Golden Globe (but no Emmy). And although the show is popular, it rarely attempts to address large social or political ideas. (A recent episode, the show's 100th, focused on a Hurricane Katrina survivor gone missing, but apart from some brief histrionics and re-created floodwaters, the case was much like any other.)
Often, it seems as if the entire show has been engineered to showcase a bruised and bruising Malone — the rest of the cast is amiable and competent, but few exude heat. Until tonight, though, Malone's been downplayed this season, at the cost of some of the show's passion. A recent episode in which he helps track the son of the aforementioned Albanian mob boss didn't pack nearly the punch of the previous one in the arc, largely because LaPaglia traded his unhinged air for mental chess. And though he's happy to simmer, he'd clearly much rather erupt.
http://www.calendarlive.com/tv/cl-ca-monitor12nov12,0,643878,print.story?coll=cl-tv-features
HDTV Notebook
Space broadcasts to be in high definition
(United Press International)
HOUSTON, Nov. 10 (UPI) -- Live broadcasts from space next week should be visually stunning and historic, NASA said from Houston, because they'll be broadcast in high definition.
The two live high definition television broadcasts will feature Expedition 14 Commander Michael Lopez-Alegria on the International Space Station, NASA said in a news release. The broadcasts, scheduled for Nov. 15, will be carried by Discovery HD Theater and the Japanese broadcast network NHK.
The broadcasts are a joint effort by NASA, the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Discovery HD Theater and NHK, the space agency said.
NASA officials in Houston said they've flown HDTV cameras on previous missions but had to wait until the mission was over to retrieve and view the tapes, then share them with scientists, engineers, the media and the public.
"For the first time ever, this test lets us stream live HDTV from space so the public can experience what its like to be there," Rodney Grubbs, NASA principal investigator, said.
HDTV resolution is about six times that of regular analog video, Grubbs said.
http://upi.com/NewsTrack/view.php?StoryID=20061110-065309-8486r
The college football HD schedule for Saturday, Nov. 18th has been updated with added games and team records in the first post of the thread. (Yes, Michigan at Ohio State will be in HD, and will be a national broadcast on ABC-TV at 3:30 PM ET.)
The BCS rankings will be added tomorrow after they are announced.
TV Notebook
What About Brian?
ABC has given “What About Brian?” a pickup for its remaining nine episodes of the season.
TV Review
“Masterpiece Theatre — Prime Suspect: The Final Act”
Helen Mirren in her 'Prime'
The actress returns in fine form in "Prime Suspect 7: The Final Act."
By Robert Lloyd Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
DSI Jane Tennison, the Scotland Yard detective played by Helen Mirren in the "Prime Suspect" series, returns for the last time Sunday, in the terminally titled "Prime Suspect 7: The Final Act." That actress and role are together again, and for the last time, qualifies this as a television event, and it does not disappoint. "Satisfying" is possibly not the right word for a film whose apportioning of pain and loss and rain-bitten gloom is so pervasive, but it doesn't violate the spirit of the series or of its perennially half-triumphant heroine. It doesn't take us out on a sour note.
The case this time involves the murder of a 14-year-old girl, but by now we don't watch "Prime Suspect" (which begins Sunday – check your local PBS listings -- in the framework of PBS' "Masterpiece Theater") for the thrill of seeing a murder solved. Murders are solved all over television every day, and there are only so many variations to play on that theme, so many shocks left to deliver — indeed, there are perhaps no shocks left to deliver, so ardently do our police shows court the perverse. And considered merely as a whodunit, the plot of "The Final Act" is neither particularly compelling nor hard for the viewer to solve, although Tennison herself has trouble along the way. (If she only recognized that she was in a television show, her job would be a lot easier.)
But all we really care about by this point is What Happens to Jane. Though more absent from our lives than not — this is, after all, only the seventh edition in 15 years (although "Prime Suspect 4" constituted three separate stories) — she's the constant, the locus of our hopes. However many victims and unhappy or luckless others litter the script, we want her to survive, and to survive with at least a slim chance of something like happiness. That Tennison is a woman fighting for respect in a man's world, the struggle that early defined her character and animated earlier episodes, has also ceased to matter. She's earned that respect; her problem now is not to squander it.
When we meet her again, after two years, she's drinking to the point of blacking out; her father (the great Frank Finlay) is dying; she has only the most tenuous relationship with the rest of her family; and her investigation has thrown her into an improvidently close relationship with the victim's best friend, Penny (the thoroughly impressive Laura Greenwood), who might represent the daughter she never had, or the sister she could actually love, or simply the friend she lacks. (The screenplay, by Frank Deasy, is happily ambiguous about these things.) "You don't seem sad," Penny tells her, "you just seem lonely." "Yes, I am," she answers. "I am lonely."
Which might not be the worst thing. Apart from the practical matters of whether her drinking will sideline her career before she gets her pension, or whether the filmmakers will even let her live to the end credits — a title like "The Final Act" does imply all sorts of awful possibilities — "Prime Suspect 7" raises the more elusive question of what makes a life worth living. Tennison's devotion to work at the expense of the things we sentimentally tend to regard as the signifiers of personal success (love, children, contentment) can be seen from one angle as a failure; her sister certainly does. And yet she has done what she set out to do.
This is also a story about age and disappearing into it. Tennison's impending retirement is a step into the void. (That she's moving to Florida sends a kind of chill down the spine, as if she had announced that she'd just swallowed poison.) She's surrounded by young people here, who can't see her for their constant text-messaging, and by cutaway images of a London that belongs to them. Also underscoring the passage of time is the return of her old occasional nemesis, Sgt. Bill Otley (Tom Bell, who died not long after), in an unexpected form. And we see her in her old room, facing her younger self, even becoming her younger self, as she dances to old 45s.
Mirren is as usual terrific, but the element of time — those 15 years — adds another layer: This is a role she doesn't interpret so much as an inhabit. An actress with no false modesty, she is often called "brave" for her willingness to look bad, and I don't mean her forgoing of cosmetic surgery, which has not-so-ironically left her more attractive than her many worked-upon peers and allows her to play actual women of more or less her actual age. (She's 61.) But she lets herself look weak here, wrung out, unfocused, undignified — she makes a frighteningly convincing drunk — and in her beauty and decay embodies both the Jane who is and the Jane who might have been, inextricably bound and beyond judgment.
http://www.calendarlive.com/tv/cl-et-primeweb10nov10,0,6408789,print.story?coll=cl-tvent
TV Review
“Masterpiece Theatre — Prime Suspect: The Final Act”
Swan Song for a Tough Old Bird
By Alessandra Stanley The New York Times
The grim, mesmerizing thing about the final season of “Prime Suspect” is not vicious murder, it’s Jane Tennison. This detective superintendent, white haired and retirement bound, is back and treated by her peers with the same snide condescension that greeted her 15 years ago when she led her first murder investigation.
“The Final Act,” the seventh and final installment of the British crime series “Prime Suspect,” (Sunday, PBS, check local listings) begins as brutally as all the others and is as good and in some ways better than the rest. The series, which stars the extraordinary Helen Mirren as Tennison, was never just a murder mystery. Each new case added a different, unsparing look at the underside of multicultural Britain: a catalog of the seven deadly sins of modern life that ranged from sexual discrimination and homophobia to racism and child abuse.
Most of all “Prime Suspect” turned the evolving portrait of Tennison, obsessively driven, arrogant and single, into a cautionary tale: the seven ages of career woman.
The first season, which was shown in Britain in 1991 and here in 1992, introduced Tennison as an eager detective, not quite young anymore but still junior in the pecking order and so consumed with catching the killer and advancing her career that she let the man in her life slip away. By the second season she was in charge, gruff but dedicated, an attractive older woman respected by her subordinates and prone to fleeting affairs with unsuitable men. Tennison began the fourth season with an abortion. Season six, which ran in 2004, charted her slow, lonely decline as younger officers jostled to take her place.
In “The Final Act,” which is on PBS this Sunday and next, Tennison is battered by full-blown alcoholism, a dying father and the needling of younger colleagues who cannot wait for her to take her pension and go away. “Final countdown, eh?” her boss asks her in a corridor. “How long now?” Tennison, nursing a hangover after a blackout the night before, murmurs that she is not sure exactly. He replies, stingingly, “Not long.”
Female detectives have become commonplace on prime time since “Prime Suspect” became a hit on PBS in 1992. But American crime shows favor postfeminist role models, women who solve crimes without sacrificing their personal lives or their femininity. On “The Closer,” a TNT series that echoes many of the elements of “Prime Suspect,” the deputy police chief played by Kyra Sedgwick is a strong-willed workaholic, but adorably so. She has a devoted live-in lover and a loyal staff, and her one shameful vice is candy, not scotch. Tennison is a generation older, her appearance and personality hardened by the sexism she battled in her youth and the demands of her hard-won career.
For all her flaws and brusque schoolmarmish cool, Tennison has a special sensitivity to victims, a repressed compassion that fuels her zeal to see justice done. That ardor leads Tennison to track down Sallie Sturdy, a 14-year-old girl from a working-class neighborhood in London who vanishes on her way to a school basketball practice.
The first episode begins with a man and woman running down a street. It’s not immediately clear whether they are being chased or are themselves in pursuit, but something looks terribly wrong.
At the same time Tennison wakes up in her apartment in gray silk pajamas, unable to remember how she got to bed or what caused the red bruise on her forehead. When she arrives, shakily, at work, she indignantly scolds a detective for not calling her at home to inform her about the missing teenager. That was a blunder: he called and spoke to her for three minutes. Tennison, who has no memory of the conversation, blusters her way past it, issuing orders and revving up for the case.
She quickly learns that Sallie, who is described by her distraught parents, Ruth (Katy Murphy) and Tony (Gary Lewis), as a model student, has a less savory secret life. Tennison relies on Sallie’s headmaster, Sean Philips (Stephen Tompkinson), and most of all Sallie’s best friend, Penny (Laura Greenwood), the headmaster’s daughter, to put together the missing pieces. When Sallie’s stabbed body is finally discovered in a park, no one is surprised except her agonized parents.
Even at the beginning of her career Tennison had a way with children, a tenderness that clashed with her crisp, brittle office manner. Upset about her father, estranged from her sister and nieces, Tennison becomes attached to Penny, in whom she sees as a younger version of herself.
And that relationship more than anything signals Tennison’s loss of self-control. Penny is a witness, first and foremost, but Tennison’s efforts to befriend her go far beyond the needs of her investigation. She takes Penny to a museum, shows her childhood books and records, and eventually drives her around London; she’s so drunk that Penny is terrified and demands to be let out.
Her drinking is not a secret; she reeks of liquor even in the interrogation room. Her boss, who is not without compassion, orders her to take a sick leave until retirement. Tennison, cornered, promises to pull herself together and retire as soon as she uncovers Sallie’s killer.
Threads from previous seasons are woven through Tennison’s tale. When she reluctantly attends her first Alcoholics Anonymous meeting, she runs into an old adversary, Sgt. Bill Otley (Tom Bell), a rival detective who did his best to undermine Tennison on her first murder case. Retired and six years sober, Otley wants to make amends and becomes the one ally Tennison can rely on as she deals with her father’s death and her own drinking. Yet even that frail crutch is knocked away before she can complete her last investigation.
Ms. Mirren, who played Elizabeth II in the recent film “The Queen,” is a fearless actress, and never more than when portraying this dedicated, redoubtable, not always lovable detective.
The aging Tennison is pitiable, but only up to a point. Even at her most desperate — and we first see her getting ready for the day’s work by pouring herself a glass of vodka and gulping it down like milk — Tennison has inner resources and a cranky determination to survive.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/10/arts/television/10susp.html?ref=television&pagewanted=print
TV Review
“Masterpiece Theatre — Prime Suspect: The Final Act”
Queen of Scotland Yard: Helen Mirren Closes the Book on 'Prime Suspect' Role
By Kathy Blumenstock Washington Post Staff Writer Sunday, November 12, 2006
Helen Mirren has portrayed various members of English royalty -- but for many TV viewers, she always will be Detective Superintendent Jane Tennison, the flinty crime solver who closes baffling cases for the London authorities.
The sleuth's career wraps up with the two-part drama "Prime Suspect: The Final Act," the seventh installment in the suspense series that first aired on PBS in 1992.
"Since then, the police work has changed, with the huge technological advances we've seen," Mirren said. "It has happened that quickly, but the ["Prime Suspect"] stories still hold up."
The actress laughed when describing a jarring detail from the first "Prime Suspect" story: a detective brandishing a bulky, early 1990s cellphone.
"Almost everything in 'PS-1' still looks so real and okay, but that cellphone gets you," Mirren said. (By contrast, the finale includes a teenager sending a text message on a cellphone the size of a credit card.)
Mirren shot the last "Prime Suspect" immediately after filming "The Queen," a recent movie that's garnering considerable Oscar buzz for her. She won an Emmy for her role as a mercurial monarch in "Elizabeth I," a film made for HBO.
When Mirren arrived on the set of "Prime Suspect," according to executive producer Rebecca Eaton, "she walked exactly like the queen. It was like seeing Queen Elizabeth."
Eaton, who's worked with Mirren in previous "Prime Suspect" installments, said the actress has created a long-running, complex character who is "so exasperating and irritating, who does things all wrong when she handles people -- and yet she is right; she has all the deep determination to find the truth at whatever personal cost."
"There is a little of watching an emotional train wreck when you see Jane Tennison, and at the end of every [miniseries], for her it was worth it," Eaton said.
The series finale centers on a missing girl
who turns up murdered. But it also delves into Tennison's life: She's reluctantly edging toward retirement as she faces her father's terminal illness and grapples with a drinking problem.
Her colleagues and bosses encourage her to leave the police force, but Tennison pleads for a chance to solve one last case. She follows leads that go nowhere while denying her alcoholism and provoking a suspect -- with tragic results.
"Jane is a vulnerable, flawed person," Mirren said. "Strong women are boring, so I play vulnerable women."
Mirren prides herself on her input in every episode of the series: She chose different writers and directors for each, which allowed every story to achieve the distinct look and feel of a stand-alone drama.
"Creative people are far better when they have freedom and feel personally involved, not that they're just coming onto a successful series," she said. "I loved that the writers would take Jane where they wanted to take her."
The final installment includes a poignant element: Tennison's longtime adversary, former Sgt. Bill Otley (Tom Bell), spots her at an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting and apologizes for having repeatedly tried to sabotage her career. But Otley's return to her life is cut short and, in a sad coincidence, Bell died Oct. 4 after a short illness.
The drama plays out over four hours, which Mirren said gave the cast and crew the luxury of working out every plot detail. "On network TV, they have holes bigger than a truck that you can drive through in a plotline," she said.
Mirren also is pleased the series has stayed true to its initial police procedural element.
"You don't want to dip into a soap opera," she said. "It was unfortunate that 'Cagney & Lacey' did that. It became all about marriage and family and got away from the police work."
Mirren, who said she won't play Jane Tennison again, said she needed to keep one very distinct souvenir from the series. "I kept Jane's police ID. It's illegal to use, and if the police find out I have it, they'll come to the door and take it," she joked.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/07/AR2006110700823_pf.html
TV Notebook
Nets prep for winter
Peacock tries to salvage skeins with sked moves
By Rick Kissell Variety Nov. 12, 2006
NBC hasn't gotten the production it was hoping for out of most of its new programs, but sked moves could gives these shows one last good shot.
While "Heroes" has been the most impressive newbie on any net this fall, "Studio 60," "Friday Night Lights" and "30 Rock" have struggled and "Kidnapped" was canceled. Critics gave the skeins good reviews, but auds have been lukewarm toward them.
As the net plans for winter, though, it must make some key decisions in determining what role, if any, these rookies will play.
First move is the shift of "30 Rock," which bombed kicking off Wednesday, to Thursday at 9:30. Its lead-in, the criminally underutilized "Scrubs," is a natural fit behind "The Office" and is a good option opposite "Grey's Anatomy" and "CSI."
And while the chances for "30 Rock" remain slim --